The Left and parliament: An interview with leading Turkish socialist Ufuk Uras.

Despite a revolutionary upheaval in a west European nation being about as likely as West Ham United winning the Premier football league, we still have sections of the UK left rejecting parliamentary politics. The most they will adhere to is the use of elections as a propaganda vehicle. I find this not only plain daft but defeatist to the core; and a betrayal of the working class people whose best interest the left claim to serve. For in todays political climate, in which all the main parties advocate centre right economic theories that have exploiting the masses at there core, it is imperative that the working classes have a voice in parliament and local council chambers.

True, the left may not be taking power any time soon, but the platform that membership of parliament offers the left is not to be scoffed at; and if used effectively, can be a powerful weapon in the lefts armory. In the UK where the parliamentary left is mainly made up of Labour Party members, they have proved pretty ineffective due to a fear of the consequences their opposition may provoke from the New Labour leadership. Even so, to be fair they have provided significant opposition to some of the worst of New Labour's legislation. 

Elsewhere in Europe, where the parliamentary opposition is not shackled to a centre right, ex reformist party, it has proved more effective and even in Turkey, where the left hold a single parliamentary seat, (leaving aside the Kurdish Party the DTP) it has managed to punch way above its weight by carefully selecting the ground it intends to fight on. At the 2007 Turkish general election Ufuk Uras, the leader of the Freedom and Solidarity Party (ÖDP) was elected to parliament as an independent. The reason he stood as an indie and not as a candidate for the ÖDP, was because the Turkish State has placed a 10% voting threshold which parties must pass to gain entry into parliament, its purpose being is to block the Kurdish and left parties from gaining entry to the Grand Assembly (Parliament). Thus for the first time, in 2007 the Kurds and it allies on the left decided to stand en masse as independents.

Uras has chosen as his main avenue of parliamentary activity the exposure of the secret deep state that has operated for decades as the scourge of Turkish democracy. It has quiet literally brought governments down; and in the process murdered, burgled, blackmailed and bribed its way across Turkey without fear of sanction, whilst targeting so called enemies of the State, and drawing up extensive blacklists of those it regarded as such. 

The current Turkish government began an inquiry into the deep state, believing by doing so it could get the military and the country's leading Court off its back. In the process leading members of a deep state organization known as Ergenekon were arrested and indicted. The men arrested included senior military officers, journalists, academics, politicians (including a leader of a left wing nationalist party) and criminals.

However now that the governing party the AK Party no longer faces the threat of closure, Ufuk Uras is determined that there should be a full parliamentary inquiry into both Ergenedon and other deep state organizations, as he fears the AK cut a deal with the military to quietly drop its campaign against the deep state. 

Ufuk recently gave an interview to the Turkish newspaper Zaman which I republish below. In which he set out his reasoning and spoke about the campaign he has waged in the Turkish parliament against the deep State and the reforms needed to democratize political parties, plus the ÖDP’s strategy for earning more votes in the next election and how the Turkish left needs to renew itself.

MH

Question: Last week on Monday Talk, the lawyer for the family of assassinated Turkish-Armenian journalist Hrant Dink said the Dink case offers an opportunity to solve the Ergenekon case because Dink’s murder showed the world that elements within the state were involved in the murder plot. Do you agree with this view?

I absolutely agree with it but, unfortunately, the Ergenekon indictment has bypassed the Dink case. Leaving aside the Dink case, in the trials against Orhan Pamuk and Dink, prior to his murder, all the personalities who showed up against them have been detained as part of the Ergenekon investigation. Those personalities were publicly threatening Dink and Pamuk. The Dink murder is not an isolated incident. Apparently, there are some official or semi-official forces behind it; they should be revealed.

What would you say of the CHP’s* comments regarding the indictment, namely that it is a ‘mouse born out of a mountain’?

I hope those words were the expression of a desire that Ergenekon is not a deep-rooted, complicated structure with illegal elements in it. There have been writers, generals and influential people detained. Calling them “mice” is quite inappropriate. There is neither a “mouse” nor a “mountain,” but a judicial inquiry into some illegal coup attempts. Even if you take just one of the accusations against the suspects -- for example, their involvement in the 2006 Council of State shooting -- you cannot belittle it by calling it a “mouse.” Even that one event is a major terrorist act.

You asked parliamentarians to support you in the establishment of an investigative commission into the coup plots against the government, but only 21 deputies backed you. 

What are the implications of this?

Deputies would have been loyal to their oaths if they had supported an investigation in Parliament against undemocratic actions. What else would prompt the deputies to defend themselves? If we do not act when we have such a concrete example, then when are we going to show that we are for democracy? They need to have some courage to have a deterrent effect on undemocratic moves. Having a stance against gangs and coup plotters is the responsibility of the deputies. A decisive act by the deputies would show there is no power above Parliament.

Is it just a matter of courage?

Deputies need to have courage to make individual decisions and take steps against undemocratic plans. However, they cannot think individually and make individual decisions, because they think and act with a group mentality. There is not an official group decision made in the party, but apparently AK Party members had a tacit agreement that they don’t want to come against this. They reasoned that there is already a judicial investigation going on so there is no need to have a parliamentary commission. This also shows the undemocratic structure of our party system.

How so?

The parties have their groups in Parliament. This type of structure does not exist in the parliaments of democratic countries. Deputies stand up when the party leader enters the group meeting as if they are in an elementary school. The word of the party leader is taken as if it is the word of God. Take the 10 percent election threshold. The European Court of Human Rights ruled recently that the election threshold was not a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights and they noted it was necessary for Turkey’s conditions because it strengthens governmental stability. Turkey has always been under “special circumstances” and not in the stratum of democratic countries. They found this practice suitable for Turkey, which is indeed derogatory for Turkey.

What are the election thresholds in other European countries?

The 10 percent threshold applied in Turkey appears to be the highest. Most European countries do not have thresholds, but if they do they are quite low. If we look at the countries around Turkey: Greece, Israel and Georgia have thresholds varying from 1.5 to 3 percent. The 7 percent threshold in Russia has been subjected to criticism. In the past Turkey had a proportional representation system and governmental stability was not in danger. In the 1965 elections, the Justice Party (AP) came to power and formed a single-party government. We have to see that proportional representation does not necessarily lead to instability. We need more freedoms and rule of law to overcome instability, not thresholds. But we have the wrong strategy when we oppose different views.

Would you elaborate on this?

For example, we have the wrong strategy in opposing the AK Party in Turkey. We should be defending more democracy and more democratic rights in fighting against the disagreeable policies of the AK Party rather than supporting a ban on it. We should overcome crises by demanding more democracy.

Do you think the AK Party will be shut down?

The closure case was opened even though the indictment was weak, so this leads us to expect a closure -- but we never desire it.

Do you expect an early election?

I don’t.

Why not?

Because I expect that in an early election scenario, parties that are in Parliament now will not get as many votes as they did in the last election. According to the polls, support for the CHP is down to 10 percent, while support for the AK Party is down to 30 percent. The second issue is the retirement plans of the deputies. They will be eligible for retirement benefits next year in autumn. Still, anything can happen; but I expect local elections to be held in March and we may expect an early election following autumn 2009. An early election would not increase the gains of the major parties as far as I can see.

What have you been doing to increase the gains of the left?

We are first looking at the local elections and trying to end the party leaders’ dominance at the local level. We want to eradicate the practice of parachuting local candidates. For local administrative positions, people should determine for themselves who their leaders will be. We hope to see national candidates emerging out of the local elections. I believe the leftist ideology of the single-party era has reached its end. We need a left defending more democracy and freedoms. We need renewal in the left. We need a renewed left gathering not at the left of the center but at the center of the left, especially considering that the center has become like a military commandership.

What are the principals of this new left?

We defend transparent politics and social policies against neo-liberal policies and a real liberal secularism against a militant secularism and we emphasize political participation at the local level. Wherever we go in Turkey, we see the public demanding more democracy and people in general do not support tools outside of democratic principles. People also demand more social policies and this can be achieved only within a democratic system.

Where do you put the CHP in this new leftist context?

In the world there is no leftist party that would defend military coups and the constitution of military rule. The secularism the CHP defends is control of religion through the state apparatus, while real secularism requires the impartiality of the state toward religion. The CHP does not even nominate Alevi candidates.

Do Alevis still support the CHP?

Some do, but there is a big division. I see that in the meetings of the Alevi associations in both Europe and Turkey, but Alevis do not see any new place to go. If they find a new address, they could easily dispense with the CHP.

You have been saying that a third of the votes you received were from Alevis, another third were from Kurds and the rest was from the left, right?

Roughly, that’s correct. This is the first time in the Turkish Republic’s history that an independent has been elected as a deputy from a region in İstanbul -- referred to as the “first region” -- where the population is about 6.5 million. There were about 3.5 million voters and I got about 81,000 votes. We’re brainstorming about whether this could be a model for other regions in Turkey. But we have to be careful about the timing. We should wait for the local elections, see the results and maybe then push the button.

What exactly will you do?

We might declare a mutual manifesto together with the opposition forces in society, such as unions, professional organizations and individuals, and create a group attractive enough for some of the existing parties to join us. This should not be a confederative structure, as that has been unsuccessful in the past. We would agree on concrete steps to be able to act together.

What type of concrete steps?

For example, creating a new constitution. We would adopt a “hurry slowly” philosophy.

There is only one socialist local administration in Turkey. It’s in Hopa, a district of the northeastern province of Artvin …

Yes, it’s the only socialist administration in Turkey and the Middle East. They set a very good example of how a local administration should serve. They have clean and inexpensive water and they provided opportunities for disabled citizens and opened beaches to the public. In short, they base their work on the philosophy of how to benefit the public. If people want to see a good alternative local administration, they need not go so far out to Europe or other countries; they should just go to Hopa.

Do you expect votes from the right?

I do, because I get calls from people who have identified themselves with the right and they say they have had a different view of what the left is, but after starting to learn about our policies they say they feel close to our views. People usually mean the CHP when they say left. But describing the CHP as a leftist party is a betrayal of the left.

About ÖDP leader Ufuk Uras.

Elected as an independent deputy in the July 22 general elections last year, Ufuk Uras is the founding leader of the Freedom and Democracy Party (ÖDP), which defends liberal socialist ideas. An academic in the field of economics, Uras was an assistant professor at İstanbul University until becoming a deputy. Among his many books are: "ÖDP Söyleşileri" (ÖDP Interviews), "Başka Bir Siyaset Mümkün" (Another Politics is Possible), "Siyaset Yazıları" (Political Writings), "Alternatif Siyaset Arayışları" (Search for Alternative Politics) and "Kurtuluş Savaşı'nda Sol" (Left in the War of Liberation). His book "İdeolojilerin Sonu mu?" (End of Ideologies?) received the Marxist Research Support Award in 1991.

* The CHP or Republican People's Party (Turkish: Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi) founded by Ataturk and currently affiliated to 2nd international. Nationalist with hint of reformism, favorite of Turkish military and State bureaucracy, led governments for decades, today main parliamentary opposition.

** http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=148051